DEEPAK BANSAL Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE two petitioners have approached this Court in their own interest as also in the interest of other about 403 voters for a direction from this Count since their names appear in the two voters lists of municipal ward No. 40 and 41 for the purpose of election to the Municipal Corporation Gwalior, their names be deleted from voters lists of ward No. 41 and their right of voting be restricted to ward No. 40. Since there was an apparent mistake we directed Shri R.A. Roman, Standing Counsel to the State Election Commission and Shri K.B. Chaturvedi, Govt. Advocate, for the State to take instructions and suggest a solution so that the election for 29th Nov. 1994 are held smoothly without any violation of law. In response to the notice a written reply has been filed today which is supported by an affidavit or Shri R.K. Jain, Electoral Registration officer, Gwalior. It has been admitted on behalf of respondents Nos. 3 and 4 that by mistake about 405 voters have been included in two lists of ward No. 40 and 41. It is also conceded that they cannot have right of voting in both the wards. Learned counsel for the authorities conducting the election, who are before us, state that as the solution to the problem created by inclusion of their names in two wards choice will be given to each individual voter to select one of the wards, for casting vote and all precautions shall be taken so that there is no double voting by the said voters.

(2.) THE learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the prayer made on behalf of the authorities conducting election should not be accepted. The learned counsel insists that direction be issued that all the voters shown in two lists be permitted to vote only in ward No. 40 where they live.

(3.) THE right of vote and contesting of election is an individual election right and no public interest litigation can be entertained. Remaining voters had not raised any objection at the time of preparation of voter lists and we do not know what could be their stand with regard to their right of vote in a particular ward. We are also aware that after the conclusion of the election the individual candidate or voter will have a right of election petition. Without, therefore, affecting or in any manner prejudicing the right of present two petitioners and other 403 voters of raising factual and legal pleas in an election petition which may be riled after the conclusion of the election to ensure smooth election that the authorities will give an option to the 405 voters whose names appear in the lists of ward No. 40 and 41 to choose one of the wards in which they will vote. As undertaken the authorities will take specia1 precaution to avoid double voting by these voters included in two wards.